Romeo And Juliet Film Analysis

Baz Luhrmann's 1996 film, Romeo + Juliet effectively appropriates the Shakespearean 16th century love tragedy. So why has Luhrmann decided to appropriate Romeo and Juliet? By changing the context, Luhrmann effectively makes the play relevant, discussing his contextual concerns of the 1990’s. This is done through the use of themes in the film, love, family disputes and hate which have remained similar to the original play, although the way they have been presented are different, in particular the form and characters. The form has had an obvious change as the original play has been adapted into a film. Characters in the film have also been appropriated to correspond with Luhrmann's contextual concerns. Hence, Luhrmann successfully appropriates the original Shakespeare play, Romeo and Juliet by maintaining similar themes, but altering the form and characterisation to fit his contextual concerns.

Techniques Used to Direct Two Film Versions of William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet Having watched two different film adaptations of 'Romeo and Juliet', it is clear to see that the two directors, Baz Luhrmann and Franco Zeffirelli, have used a number of different techniques, quite differently at times, to put across their particular interpretations of the play. These methods and different interpretations are very obvious if you should study the same scene as portrayed in each film. We looked at the introduction and the opening scene of each film to compare the differences between them and found that the differences, though some were more subtle than others, were obvious. Whilst Franco

The films have different interpretations in them, the directors have had to create the visuals where nothing is said by the text. The director has to be like your imagination when you read a book. Costumes are very different in both films, mainly because they are set in different times, but partly because of the way the director had interpreted the play. In Zeffirelli, the Montagues wear dull colours like grey and blue and the Capulets wear orange and black (which could indicate danger). In Lurhmann, however, it is the opposite; The Montagues wear really bright clothes and the Capulets wear black. Although the Montagues wear different clothes, the Capulets wear

     There are many similarities and differences between the sixties version of Romeo and Juliet and the modern version of Romeo and Juliet. It is very easy to spot these differences considering the time period each movie was set in. There are some things in the play that totally got cut from both movies. There are also some things that they added to the movies that weren’t in the play. Let us get on to the similarities and differences.

Two films, both alike in content, set in fair Verona, where the directors laid out their scene, one created by Franco Zeffirelli in 1968 and the other by Baz Luhbrmann in 1996. Both cinematic, both staying true to the plot and dialogue, each one radically different than the other, Zeffirelli sets his film within historical actuality, while Luhbrmann presents his with a modern twist. A story of love, revenge and death, revolving around a pair of star-crossed lovers, interpreted differently, but presented in the same form.

Lots of music, fast cuts, fantastic cinematography and superb sets and costumes make it the lively tale it was meant to be. These features also make the film somewhat cartoon-like with a lot of heightened realism. Don't expect to see British people prancing around in tights when you rent this one. Luhrmann creates a world where gun-toting youths sport Hawaiian shirts and beachfront brawls are an everyday event.

Romeo and Juliet, written by William Shakespeare, is a tragic love story about two young lovers who are forced to be estranged as a result of their feuding families. The play is about their struggle to contravene fate and create a future together. As such, it was only a matter of time before Hollywood would try and emulate Shakespeare’s masterpiece. This had been done before in many films. Prominent among them were, Franco Zeffirelli’s 1968 “Romeo and Juliet” and Baz Luhrmann’s 1996 “William Shakespeare’s Romeo & Juliet.” Both films stay true to the themes of Shakespeare’s original play. However, the modernised Luhrmann film not only maintains the essence of Shakespeare’s writings, Luhrmann makes it relevant to a teenage audience. This is

To relate to a modern audience further, Lurhmann shows the families as gangs. When you see the Montague boys driving in their car they are all dressed the same and acting the same. You then come across the Capulet’s who again are dressed the same and acting the same. Both gangs meet up in the petrol stations and start having a fight. The fight resembles gang warfare in the modern society. By showing the families as gangs, Lurhmann can relate to the younger modern audience even more because they understand the hatred between two gangs in a big city and how if they meet up, there is always a fight.

While in Zeffirelli’s version the setting plays little to no role in the story, it is used as a tool for the characters as well as to convey emotion in in Luhrmann’s version. For example Tybalt falls on and shatters a sheet of glass while fighting Mercutio, and uses a shard of this glass to stab Mercutio under Romeo’s arm. Also while Romeo is fighting Tybalt it is raining to convey a sense of grimness in the scene. As well as the better use of setting the actors also give a better portrayal of their characters in Luhrmann’s version, for example after Tybalt kills Mercutio, Leonardo DiCaprio, who plays Romeo, is crying and yelling, cursing Tybalt, while in the Zeffirelli version the actor playing Romeo seems as if the barely cares that Mercutio is dead.

Another significant scene that was portrayed differently in the two versions was the suicide scene. Zeferelli’s version is once again almost exact to what we read in the book. Romeo sees what he perceives to be a dead Juliet lying in her family’s tomb, and distraught by the sight he drinks poison. When Juliet awakens from her sleep she finds Romeo dead, and stabs herself with his knife. In Luhrmanns version Romeo goes to the church where Juliet is laid out for her funeral. He also sees what he perceives to be a dead Juliet and drinks poison. When Juliet awakens from her sleep she finds out Romeo has swallowed poison and is dying. The main difference lies in the fact that we are led to believe that maybe he will see her awake

This director’s choice shows that both directors cherished and respected Shakespeare's written text. In Zeffirelli’s film, the dialogue fits in with the other aspects of the film, such as the costumes and set. since everything is traditional, but what is interesting is that the actors manage to sound very natural and comfortable with the dialogue. They managed to convey strong emotion with help of the text and entirely transformed into the characters. Since, Zefferelli's version both includes the traditional sets, costumes, and language it makes it easy for the audience to understand the original play, the film is straightforward and does not contradict the original play, making the film a credible resort for those who want to have a better understanding of the story. Unlike Zeffirelli’s version, Luhrmann’s costumes and set do not suit the dialogue, making the Shakespearean dialogue in his version both strange to watch and hear, another odd aspect is that at times the characters did not precisely mean what they were saying, for instance, when a character was talking about their sword, they were actually talking about their guns named sword, consequently, this made the dialogue confusing to follow at times. Nevertheless, the actors in both films managed to execute an admirable performance and did Shakespeare's text

Romeo and Juliet is a very well known book that is loved by many. There numerous movies done on Romeo and Juliet like Baz Luhrmann’s 1996 version and Gnomeo and Juliet. There are many apparent differences like using guns instead of swords and using gnomes instead of people. Although there are many similarities, the differences between Luhrmann’s movie and Gnomeo and Juliet compared to the play Romeo and Juliet are evident. The similarities between the movie and the play only go down to the plot and language.

While for the Luhrmann film the character seemed like they were just wearing everyday outfits. In both films, we see that they used a different location to film the movie and used different objects as weapons. For example, in the Zeffirelli film, they used swords and knife to murder one another and a knife which is used when Juliet kills herself. For the Luhrmann, since it’s more modern they don’t use and swords or knives instead they use guns. They both also used the same language as in the play which gives it that more realness to the story and gives the audience that the story was written a few hundred years

The portrayal of adolescence in film is a relatively new concept, and one that many directors have attempted in their career to varying results. Some directors are able to capture the awkward, bumbling phase of adolescence perfectly. However, there are some representations of teenagers that cause much debate, and can generally leave viewers confused about the director’s intentions. On one hand, a director can undoubtedly celebrate teenage culture through a variety of techniques, however on the other hand they can criticise teenagers and their aimed demographic, in some cases simultaneously, and especially when adapting Shakespeare. William Shakespeare’s Romeo + Juliet is an adaptation that has stirred much controversy since its release,

Baz Luhrmann's film adaptation of Romeo and Juliet although set in a modernised location is able to obtain the shakespearean language from the original text. Some lines of the play in Luhrmann's version have been switched around and been given to different characters such as the beginning fight scene where instead of the men of the Capulets house who start the brawl its the men of the montague household. However this does not influence the overall state of the film. In contrast to Luhrmann’s version Carlo Carlei’s adaptation of the play only utilizes certain lines from the original text instead of the whole dialogue. This version mixes lines from the original text with some of our modern day language, thus not allowing the film to flow.